Possible fallout from not being a union member?

deiseindublin

So annoyed (yet again) at the TUI and our membership, they'd leave you down with a bang every time.

Really considering just cutting my losses and not bothering with any union membership . They don't represent me and haven't in a long time.

I'm not part of an income continuance plan so can leave quite easily. I know that I wouldn't get any pittance of a wage agreement that TUI pretended to negotiate.

Just wondering what other factors I should be considering first?

evolving_doors

deiseindublin wrote: »

So annoyed (yet again) at the TUI and our membership, they'd leave you down with a bang every time.

Really considering just cutting my losses and not bothering with any union membership . They don't represent me and haven't in a long time.

I'm not part of an income continuance plan so can leave quite easily. I know that I wouldn't get any pittance of a wage agreement that TUI pretended to negotiate.

Just wondering what other factors I should be considering first?

Maybe instead of thinking just individually and nationally, think about the school you're in. If the union numbers start to dwindle then it's open season, and you have no recourse or someone experienced to come in to the school and speak on you or the staff's behalf. First dissenter might be in the firing line with punitive timetable new school year.

...or maybe consider switching sides to the ASTI :eek:

Actually is it fair game to switch sides now as there's no dispute?

ethical

The one big reason to be a union member is to have legal cover ,should you need it,otherwise have very,very deep pockets to fork out for legal advice and protection when.if you require it!

deiseindublin

evolving_doors wrote: »

If the union numbers start to dwindle then it's open season

Is it not open season already?

deiseindublin

ethical wrote: »

The one big reason to be a union member is to have legal cover ,should you need it,otherwise have very,very deep pockets to fork out for legal advice and protection when.if you require it!

I reckon those of us disillusioned enough should be investing our subs in a rainy day fund for such legal advice. At least then you'd know there was nobody pretending to represent you.

Seámus-Púbach

On a similar theme, looking for info, I'm in an ASTI school and am not part off a union. Ironically its because I could not afford to join when renting in Dublin and not on full hours when I got out off college (after the initial 1st year). I've - foolishly- never really got around to joining as the years have passed.

2 Questions:
If I join over the mid term break for example, will I be paid up for just the rest of the academic year, or until next October/November?

If I join over the mid term break will I be permitted to vote in the upcoming ballot?

Cheer for any help

mtoutlemonde

Seámus-Púbach wrote: »

On a similar theme, looking for info, I'm in an ASTI school and am not part off a union. Ironically its because I could not afford to join when renting in Dublin and not on full hours when I got out off college (after the initial 1st year). I've - foolishly- never really got around to joining as the years have passed.

2 Questions:
If I join over the mid term break for example, will I be paid up for just the rest of the academic year, or until next October/November?

If I join over the mid term break will I be permitted to vote in the upcoming ballot?

Cheer for any help

If you join over mid-term you will pay for the rest of the year. You will not be a full member until ratified at branch meeting. If you're subbing, it's ~€50 for the year, if more it's calculated on your hours and comes from your payslip.

As far as I know you won't be able to vote in the upcoming ballot as you wouldn't be on the school list. I'm not a shop steward but there may be spare ballots for people like yourself just joining.

It's extremely important to be in a union for that one parent that could ruin your career!!!

Seámus-Púbach

mtoutlemonde wrote: »

Seámus-Púbach wrote: »

On a similar theme, looking for info, I'm in an ASTI school and am not part off a union. Ironically its because I could not afford to join when renting in Dublin and not on full hours when I got out off college (after the initial 1st year). I've - foolishly- never really got around to joining as the years have passed.

2 Questions:
If I join over the mid term break for example, will I be paid up for just the rest of the academic year, or until next October/November?

If I join over the mid term break will I be permitted to vote in the upcoming ballot?

Cheer for any help

If you join over mid-term you will pay for the rest of the year. You will not be a full member until ratified at branch meeting. If you're subbing, it's ~€50 for the year, if more it's calculated on your hours and comes from your payslip.  

As far as I know you won't be able to vote in the upcoming ballot as you wouldn't be on the school list. I'm not a shop steward but there may be spare ballots for people like yourself just joining.  

It's extremely important to be in a union for that one parent that could ruin your career!!!

Thats the big one! Cheers for that reply!

Dunne_bkill

mtoutlemonde wrote:

If you join over mid-term you will pay for the rest of the year. You will not be a full member until ratified at branch meeting. If you're subbing, it's ~€50 for the year, if more it's calculated on your hours and comes from your payslip.

I'm a casual sub in a school for the year, can I join for this €50 fee? Was under the impression you had to have a contract somewhere.

SligoBrewer

mtoutlemonde wrote: »

If you join over mid-term you will pay for the rest of the year. You will not be a full member until ratified at branch meeting. If you're subbing, it's ~€50 for the year, if more it's calculated on your hours and comes from your payslip.

As far as I know you won't be able to vote in the upcoming ballot as you wouldn't be on the school list. I'm not a shop steward but there may be spare ballots for people like yourself just joining.

It's extremely important to be in a union for that one parent that could ruin your career!!!

There's no spare ballots for new members. Either you are in by a certain date or you are not. Sin é.

mtoutlemonde

Dunne_bkill wrote: »

I'm a casual sub in a school for the year, can I join for this €50 fee? Was under the impression you had to have a contract somewhere.

No you don't need a contract to be a member. You will need two ASTI members to sign your membership form though.

SligoBrewer wrote: »

There's no spare ballots for new members. Either you are in by a certain date or you are not. Sin é.

That's what I thought but just wasn't 100% sure.

Samsarah

ethical wrote: »

The one big reason to be a union member is to have legal cover ,should you need it,otherwise have very,very deep pockets to fork out for legal advice and protection when.if you require it!

Is there any evidence of unions providing representation for members when needed. I have heard many stories of the teaching unions throwing members under the bus at their time of need. I really don’t think that they can be relied on for protection of individual members rights.

SligoBrewer

Samsarah wrote: »

Is there any evidence of unions providing representation for members when needed. I have heard many stories of the teaching unions throwing members under the bus at their time of need.

Loads. People aren't going to divulge PI on here but safe to say the trope is true for a reason.

Samsarah

SligoBrewer wrote: »

Loads. People aren't going to divulge PI on here but safe to say the trope is true for a reason.

Sorry, but I do not believe your spin.

Snotty

Samsarah wrote: »

Sorry, but I do not believe your spin.

Me neither

SligoBrewer

Samsarah wrote: »

Sorry, but I do not believe your spin.

Believe what you want, it's your future not mine.

beveragelady

The most recent ballot leaves us with one of two possible conclusions to draw.
A) The majority of union members are grabby excrement-heads who decided to accept an unfair pay agreement because it suited them.
The ballot is a farce and a charade, and the TUI executive are laughing at us while returning whatever result they want.

Either way, it's not an organisation I want to be a part of any more.

If a union isn't able to use the voice of the many to protect the few, and the voice of the strong to protect the weak, what on earth is it all for?

Samsarah

SligoBrewer wrote: »

Believe what you want, it's your future not mine.

Yes it is. And I would like to go to work each day safe in the knowledge that my rights as an employee are protected. However I do not have that option because the unions representing teachers often lack the necessary expertise, and more importantly have become so political that they have lost sight of the members who fund their union.

evolving_doors

deiseindublin wrote: »

I reckon those of us disillusioned enough should be investing our subs in a rainy day fund for such legal advice. At least then you'd know there was nobody pretending to represent you.

You'd probably need 5 years of subs to press a solicitors doorbell.
And again employment law isn't quite as clearcut when it comes to the multitude of teaching contracts... presumably child protection would mean a knowledgeable solicitor in that area too.

evolving_doors

Samsarah wrote: »

Is there any evidence of unions providing representation for members when needed. I have heard many stories of the teaching unions throwing members under the bus at their time of need. I really don’t think that they can be relied on for protection of individual members rights.

In monthly newsletters they refer to cases (ASTI anyway, dunno about tui)
Also a regular poster on here said that their union got contracts sorted. Once the Principal knew the union were aware of the discrepancy they backed down.... could they have just gone the legal route straight away? Probably but legal should only be the final straw.
Also you can do a Google search for legal employment cases in the courts. Search for CID teacher court and away you go. Little bit of digging but the cases are there.

SligoBrewer

evolving_doors wrote: »

In monthly newsletters they refer to cases (ASTI anyway, dunno about tui)
Also a regular poster on here said that their union got contracts sorted. Once the Principal knew the union were aware of the discrepancy they backed down.... could they have just gone the legal route straight away? Probably but legal should only be the final straw.
Also you can do a Google search for legal employment cases in the courts. Search for CID teacher court and away you go. Little bit of digging but the cases are there.

Hey man, less of the spin.

mvron

Samsarah wrote: »

Is there any evidence of unions providing representation for members when needed. I have heard many stories of the teaching unions throwing members under the bus at their time of need. I really don’t think that they can be relied on for protection of individual members rights.

I'm one of the people who the union (successfully) fought for & I can honestly say that I will never give my membership because of it.

evolving_doors

SligoBrewer wrote: »

Hey man, less of the spin.

I'm only answering his question Sir.

Samsarah

evolving_doors wrote: »

In monthly newsletters they refer to cases (ASTI anyway, dunno about tui)
Also a regular poster on here said that their union got contracts sorted. Once the Principal knew the union were aware of the discrepancy they backed down.... could they have just gone the legal route straight away? Probably but legal should only be the final straw.
Also you can do a Google search for legal employment cases in the courts. Search for CID teacher court and away you go. Little bit of digging but the cases are there.

I’m thinking of filing grievances, dealing with the disciplinary process, dismissal cases which are considerably more complex. Dealing with contracts is quite straightforward and it would be easy enough to get representation outside of the union.

Samsarah

mvron wrote: »

I'm one of the people who the union (successfully) fought for & I can honestly say that I will never give my membership because of it.

It would be helpful if you could elaborate a little on your experience, without giving too much personal information.

gaiscioch

ethical wrote: »

The one big reason to be a union member is to have legal cover ,should you need it,otherwise have very,very deep pockets to fork out for legal advice and protection when.if you require it!

evolving_doors wrote: »

You'd probably need 5 years of subs to press a solicitors doorbell.

mtoutlemonde wrote: »

It's extremely important to be in a union for that one parent that could ruin your career!!!

All of these, 100%. None of us want to be the next Eileen Flynn, a non-ASTI teacher whose career was destroyed by thugs in power using legal judgements that were truly shocking. If it were possible to take out additional protection and I were in a fee-charging school I would as one's probably more likely to encounter a parent with big pockets, better connections and a partiality for threatening and intimidating there.

In that context, the union's resources should be able to not just protect your career and reputation but to help you protect your mental health. You really do not want to be alone when more connected people or a more powerful organisation decides to target you. That €335 I pay each year to the ASTI is just another insurance policy, a recognition that there are far more powerful people than I and that, as the Eileen Flynn case showed, it would be ineffably naive on my part to think justice will automatically triumph over injustice.

AndrewJRenko

beveragelady wrote: »

The most recent ballot leaves us with one of two possible conclusions to draw.
A) The majority of union members are grabby excrement-heads who decided to accept an unfair pay agreement because it suited them.
The ballot is a farce and a charade, and the TUI executive are laughing at us while returning whatever result they want.

Either way, it's not an organisation I want to be a part of any more.

If a union isn't able to use the voice of the many to protect the few, and the voice of the strong to protect the weak, what on earth is it all for?

Did you do much campaigning for votes yourself?


The union is a strong as the members.

beveragelady

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Did you do much campaigning for votes yourself?


The union is a strong as the members.

I've never known anybody to campaign for non-election votes in a TUI ballot. I've certainly never been approached by campaigners attempting to sway my vote.

So no, I don't get classes covered so I can travel to other schools to make speeches from the stump in the run-up to a ballot. However, I discuss and argue the various issues with colleagues. Will that do?

We keep being told that the union is as strong as its members, as if that should make us feel chastened for questioning its integrity and purpose. Infuriating.

AndrewJRenko

beveragelady wrote: »

I've never known anybody to campaign for non-election votes in a TUI ballot. I've certainly never been approached by campaigners attempting to sway my vote.

So no, I don't get classes covered so I can travel to other schools to make speeches from the stump in the run-up to a ballot. However, I discuss and argue the various issues with colleagues. Will that do?

We keep being told that the union is as strong as its members, as if that should make us feel chastened for questioning its integrity and purpose. Infuriating.

I didn't mention anything about going to other schools. If everyone interested covered their own school, that would make a big difference to the result. Turnout was very low, I hear.


Have you gone to union meetings to raise these issues? Or taken on the role of local union rep?

beveragelady

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

I didn't mention anything about going to other schools. If everyone interested covered their own school, that would make a big difference to the result. Turnout was very low, I hear.


Have you gone to union meetings to raise these issues? Or taken on the role of local union rep?

I rarely miss a union meeting. I have been a branch secretary, and held other less taxing roles.
I have no idea why you're making this all about me though,

AndrewJRenko

beveragelady wrote: »

I rarely miss a union meeting. I have been a branch secretary, and held other less taxing roles.
I have no idea why you're making this all about me though,

Fair play for taking on those roles. Isn't that the solution - for the disgruntled teachers to take on more roles and be more active - to ensure the union is meeting their needs and addressing their issues. It is their union.

beveragelady

You tell me that the union is only as strong as its members, then you imply that unless I have put myself forward for more prominent roles my complaints are somehow less valid. The union should represent its members whether they choose to join the self-important mountebanks at the top table or not.

AndrewJRenko

beveragelady wrote: »

You tell me that the union is only as strong as its members, then you imply that unless I have put myself forward for more prominent roles my complaints are somehow less valid. The union should represent its members whether they choose to join the self-important mountebanks at the top table or not.

Yeah, it should certainly represent its members. I guess their argument would be that they ARE representing their members through their democratic processes at branch and sector level. Hence my suggestion for a possible solution:

Samsarah

beveragelady wrote: »

I rarely miss a union meeting. I have been a branch secretary, and held other less taxing roles.
I have no idea why you're making this all about me though,

It's an effort to undermine you, there are many who do very well out of the cronyism that has been stifling some unions for years now, as is clear from the fight back that accompanies any expression of discontent, particularly in social media.
There is little accountability in the teaching unions in their present form, and their growing politicization has transformed them into members of the establishment, and increased the disconnect with ordinary members and the sense of fear and apathy that many feel. In many ways unions are helping to maintain the status quo, and serve to police any challenges that may arise. Again, there are many who are doing very well out of this.

It's not up to you to sort out the union at grassroots level, this is the job of the people who are paid through members subscriptions, and those who have been entrusted by the membership to represent them.

SligoBrewer

It's also the job of members not only to vote for the right people into positions of power but to not legitimise political bedfellows by leaving them unchallenged in those positions.

Samsarah

SligoBrewer wrote: »

It's also the job of members not only to vote for the right people into positions of power but to not legitimise political bedfellows by leaving them unchallenged in those positions.

Unfortunately rampant cronyism has limited the choices available to members, and the fear of the establishment within education and repercussion for speaking out has left many members feeling intimidated, helpless and indeed seeing the situation as a hopeless one.
Members need to see the connection between their payment of membership fees and the problems within the unions that seem to be going from bad to worse. Unions literally copper-fasten government policy, neglect to challenge misrepresentations regarding the role of the teacher, side with management on the whole and endorse practices that would not be allowed in any other profession. They ruthlessly police any voices of dissent.
The only way to bring about change is by cancelling membership fees. By paying into a union you are endorsing what I have outlined above. Union membership is not an insurance policy, contrary to what many believe. It's more or less protection money, provided you play their game.
If members want to bring about change they need to start cancelling the money they pay every year to these corrupt organisations.

AndrewJRenko

Samsarah wrote: »

It's an effort to undermine you

No, it's not. It's an effort to encourage the OP to take action to drive the union in the direction they want.


I don't disagree with much of the rest of your post.

Samsarah wrote: »

It's not up to you to sort out the union at grassroots level

You ARE the union at grassroots level.

doc_17

If there wasn’t a union the pay gap imposed in 2011 would still be in place - 100% of it. Do you really think it would have changed if nobody was lobbying for it?

beveragelady

doc_17 wrote: »

If there wasn’t a union the pay gap imposed in 2011 would still be in place - 100% of it. Do you really think it would have changed if nobody was lobbying for it?

The choice should not be between 'substandard union' and 'no union.'

Samsarah

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

No, it's not. It's an effort to encourage the OP to take action to drive the union in the direction they want.


I don't disagree with much of the rest of your post.




You ARE the union at grassroots level.

No, you provide the funding for the organisation. However, sadly, issues with cronyism, bullying, repercussion, and fear of the powers that be that control work within the profession has meant that many members have turned their back on the unions, unable/unwilling to get involved in the toxic situation.
I am by no means tarring everyone with the same brush, there are many good people who are active in the union movement, who have given freely of their time and energy, sometimes over many years. I believe the leadership has a lot to answer for, and the balance of power rests in their hands. They control paid positions within the union, information that is put into circulation, and may hold a lot of sway when it comes to appointments within schools.
Traditionally certain organisations within society were untouchable, while this attitude is very slowly being challenged, such attitudes still prevail in education, with the powers that be still as powerful as ever. The teaching unions fall under this remit, and are seen as enablers of the status quo.

Expecting members to challenge this is niave, as once again they control the work and conditions within the profession.

Samsarah

doc_17 wrote: »

If there wasn’t a union the pay gap imposed in 2011 would still be in place - 100% of it. Do you really think it would have changed if nobody was lobbying for it?

The unions accepted this, they were the people who were at the negotiating table when it came to brokering a deal. I do think that the quality of leadership came into play here, and negotiating skills, and the deal for teachers was particularly bad, especially for new entrants to the profession.

One union did try to address this, but the govt played one union against the other with the other union happy to play along. This completely weakened all the teaching unions, and while the third union could have made a stand on this, being the most traditional if them all they stood by and let it happen. There are LPTs in the membership of all three unions.

The reality is years of rolling over and saying yes has significantly weakened the three unions, maybe even other public sector unions where a monopoly exists, so while they may be all powerful within the field of education, in the bigger picture they hold little influence.

beveragelady

Samsarah wrote: »

No, you provide the funding for the organisation.

This is important. I pay somebody to represent me. It takes real nerve to tell me I need to get my act together and make more of an effort to represent myself.

deiseindublin

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Yeah, it should certainly represent its members. I guess their argument would be that they ARE representing their members through their democratic processes at branch and sector level. Hence my suggestion for a possible solution:

TUI aren't representing members. The likes of their meeting in Lucan last week basically focused on bullying voters into submission, all the while saying they weren't recommending a Yes.

They're despicable as far as I'm concerned. They basically don't want any strife, just keep rolling over and telling us how bad we might have it otherwise.

But it's all ok, let's not forget their platitudes that the LPT fight is not over :rolleyes: .

doc_17

beveragelady wrote: »

The choice should not be between 'substandard union' and 'no union.'

It isn’t.

doc_17

Samsarah wrote: »

The unions accepted this, they were the people who were at the negotiating table when it came to brokering a deal. I do think that the quality of leadership came into play here, and negotiating skills, and the deal for teachers was particularly bad, especially for new entrants to the profession.

One union did try to address this, but the govt played one union against the other with the other union happy to play along. This completely weakened all the teaching unions, and while the third union could have made a stand on this, being the most traditional if them all they stood by and let it happen. There are LPTs in the membership of all three unions.

The reality is years of rolling over and saying yes has significantly weakened the three unions, maybe even other public sector unions where a monopoly exists, so while they may be all powerful within the field of education, in the bigger picture they hold little influence.

Sigh.....

The Unions didn’t accept unequal pay scales in 2011. The CP Deal was agreed in 2010. The pay inequality was imposed from the floor of the Dail for the 2011 budget AFTER THE CP1 AGREEMENT. Unions did not negotiate this. This did not arise because it was put to a ballot of teachers and the teachers chose to cut the pay of teachers appointed after 2010.

Does that make it acceptable? No, but at least get the basics right.

deiseindublin

doc_17 wrote: »

The Unions didn’t accept unequal pay scales in 2011.

Not in 2011, but in 2018 with a weak government the TUI voted to accept unequal pay and a permanent pension levy.

Go TUI, playing a blinder there.

doc_17

deiseindublin wrote: »

Not in 2011, but in 2018 with a weak government the TUI voted to accept unequal pay and a permanent pension levy.

Go TUI, playing a blinder there.

Sigh......again, let’s please get the basics right. The TUI rejected the PSSA 87% to 13%. The only reason we’re in is because once Siptu and Unite accept then the game’s over.

richiepurgas

I 'm not talking about teaching unions specifically here, but there's never been a more crucial time for any worker who can to be in a union.
Where they are not recognised, workers often get an awful time and spend their entire time in a state of insecurity.

AndrewJRenko

beveragelady wrote: »

This is important. I pay somebody to represent me.

It sounds like you're looking for an insurance service, or a legal expert hotline, not a trade union. What makes unions unique is the collective strength of the members.

deiseindublin

doc_17 wrote: »

Sigh......again, let’s please get the basics right. The TUI rejected the PSSA 87% to 13%. The only reason we’re in is because once Siptu and Unite accept then the game’s over.

Yes, they rejected PSSA but just 3 days ago accepted this crock of sh*t with a little bit of equality. There's no escaping that.

doc_17

deiseindublin wrote: »

Yes, they rejected PSSA but just 3 days ago accepted this crock of sh*t with a little bit of equality. There's no escaping that.

Agreed. But if you think that by being the only sector (Teaching) to reject the deal will get us anywhere then can I offer you up the ASTI as exhibit A. Their policy was delusional and destructive to their union and members voted accordingly - both in EGM and with their feet.

Like it or not it’s a long campaign but it’s being won. Eventually it will be won and that’s because there are Unions there to fight it.